OT: Mizzou to Big 10 interview w/Alden

[Postcard]

I just mentioned Mizzou as their seems to be talk about them, nothing directed to you.

The west coast gets very little east coast air time as the games start too late. Texas isn't going to take the Pac 10 to Big 10 money, not even close. Pac 10 is relatively low now. Fla does pretty well in the SEC and I don't see them leaving it.

Texas doesn't really care much for the Big 12 north schools (and who can blame them) the money in the Big 12 even for Texas which gets a Lions share is much less than the Big 10. The only schools Texas cares to play in the Big 12 is A&M and OU.

I do know there is a lot of talk and support for looking at the move among Texas fans. I still think the Big 10's first choice would be ND even though Texas would open up a very large market they currently have no peice of to them.

Doesn't the Texas Athletic Program make the most money of any program in the country?

[Postcard]

This was Mizzou's announcer, name escapes me, who said this about their academics. It is ranked worse academically than all of the Big 10. To his credit, he has a more realistic view than most of their delusional fans.

I think all of the Big 10 schools are ranked in the top 80(by US News and World Reports). SLU and Mizzou were I believe 88 and 102 respectively. Neither would cut the muster if it was all about academics. I would still argue that both SLU and Mizzou are good schools even though you're trying to say that they're not.

[slufanskip]

Doesn't the Texas Athletic Program make the most money of any program in the country?

Football, yes. by a lot.

[GOSLU68]

Well for the Big 10 it's all about money. For Missouri (or Pitt or Rutgers or Louisville, etc.) Academics play a role. Being able to join the CIC is a boon for those institutions.

Not sure why this thread is here instead of Columbia; but I think it is a real joke to mention Louisville and athletics in the same breath. They were always

the odd man out in whatever conference we were in all the way back to Saint Louis being in the MVC with Cincy, etc.

I think MIzzou fits the Big 12 and they should be grateful for what they have. Navy would destroy them acacemically and we have heard what happened

on the football field.

[brianstl]

I mentioned before there is a lot of talk and support of Texas joining the Big 10. Another guys opinion and a really good breakdown of why it makes sense.

http://frankthetank.wordpress.com/2009/12/...hade-of-orange/

Texas can't join the Big 10 because the bylaws of the Big 10 won't allow it. Any expnsion canidate has to either be in a current Big 10 state or state contiguous to the current Big 10 states.

[Cowboy]

Texas can't join the Big 10 because the bylaws of the Big 10 won't allow it. Any expnsion canidate has to either be in a current Big 10 state or state contiguous to the current Big 10 states.

-i would guess if they want 'em, they'll change the bylaws faster than bauman can type a post saying he does not like hearing the names andre miller or utah

[Pistol]

This was Mizzou's announcer, name escapes me, who said this about their academics. It is ranked worse academically than all of the Big 10. To his credit, he has a more realistic view than most of their delusional fans.

But in his defense (and trust me, I am no apologist for Mizzou), the academic ratings of the Big Ten schools in the US News & World Report (for some reason the authority on the subject) are f-ing ridiculously inflated. How are the lowest-rated schools in the Big Ten rated #71 (Michigan State, Indiana, and Iowa)? Most schools in the Big Ten could qualify as safety schools for B-students in those states. Whatever they're doing to manipulate the USNWR rankings needs to be outlawed. F the Big Ten.

Not that Mizzou or any of the other potential Big Ten transfers (Rutgers, Cincinnati, UConn, Syracuse, Texas) are far greater academically, but what needs to be acknowledged is that these ratings are a pile of wet crap.

[cheeseman]

I just mentioned Mizzou as their seems to be talk about them, nothing directed to you.

The west coast gets very little east coast air time as the games start too late. Texas isn't going to take the Pac 10 to Big 10 money, not even close. Pac 10 is relatively low now. Fla does pretty well in the SEC and I don't see them leaving it.

Texas doesn't really care much for the Big 12 north schools (and who can blame them) the money in the Big 12 even for Texas which gets a Lions share is much less than the Big 10. The only schools Texas cares to play in the Big 12 is A&M and OU.

I do know there is a lot of talk and support for looking at the move among Texas fans. I still think the Big 10's first choice would be ND even though Texas would open up a very large market they currently have no peice of to them.

ND already said thanks but no thanks the other day.

[Quality Is Job 1]

If SLU hadn't dumped football in 1949, it would be perfect for membership in the Big 10. It would give Northwestern a similarly-minded school.

[Majerus Magic]

If SLU hadn't dumped football in 1949, it would be perfect for membership in the Big 10. It would give Northwestern a similarly-minded school.

God I would love to be in the Big Ten.

[GOSLU68]

God I would love to be in the Big Ten.

Saiint Louis fans are starved for good football and Saturdays at the Ed Jones Dome are open-if we hit another Chaifetz a football team could come on

stream cheaper than the arena we just built

[For-DaLove]

I'm not sure if anyone touched on this or not because I only read the first page of comments, but Texas isn't even in the talks of joining the Big 10. This is because in the Big 10's bi-laws it says in order for a new school to join, the state which it is in must border a state that already has a Big 10 school in it. This is why Mizzou is in the discussion. If the Big 10 offers to let Mizzou join the conference they will do it, no questions asked. The Big 10 has a huge T.V. contract and the higher academic standards make it a no brainer.

[slufanskip]

I'm not sure if anyone touched on this or not because I only read the first page of comments, but Texas isn't even in the talks of joining the Big 10. This is because in the Big 10's bi-laws it says in order for a new school to join, the state which it is in must border a state that already has a Big 10 school in it. This is why Mizzou is in the discussion. If the Big 10 offers to let Mizzou join the conference they will do it, no questions asked. The Big 10 has a huge T.V. contract and the higher academic standards make it a no brainer.

The guy who wrote that seemed to think the border state thing was like a wives tail, at least that's the way I interpreted what he said. Here is something I know, I have no idea whether the Big 10 considers Texas a viable option, but I do know that there is support from people close to the Texas program who also claim there is support from within. I'm not saying Texas has decided they go if asked, I don't have a way to know that. If there was really no way Texas could join, or the Big 10 wasn't interested, there would be no real support and there is.

I also think what this guy says makes sense. The Big 12 would probably break up or be severly weakened with Mizzou or Nebraska going. Why would Texas let that happen? They won't. Even if their is a bylaw, when you consider the advantages of the Big 10 taking Texas over Mizzou financially, I can't imagine they wouldn't be changed.

Who knows for sure though. I think something will happen though.

[ACE]

But in his defense (and trust me, I am no apologist for Mizzou), the academic ratings of the Big Ten schools in the US News & World Report (for some reason the authority on the subject) are f-ing ridiculously inflated. How are the lowest-rated schools in the Big Ten rated #71 (Michigan State, Indiana, and Iowa)? Most schools in the Big Ten could qualify as safety schools for B-students in those states. Whatever they're doing to manipulate the USNWR rankings needs to be outlawed. F the Big Ten.

Not that Mizzou or any of the other potential Big Ten transfers (Rutgers, Cincinnati, UConn, Syracuse, Texas) are far greater academically, but what needs to be acknowledged is that these ratings are a pile of wet crap.

He seemed to think the ratings were a factor and that doesn't even take into account their long history of athletic scandals.

[Lurking Dog]

http://www.columbiatribune.com/news/2009/d...and-temptation/

"Another thing that probably is frustrating a little bit for Missouri — and that’s not to disparage any other programs, because there are really fine academic institutions in our entire league, they all are — but academically our student-athletes have done a great job and they’ve really performed at a high level. ... We’re somewhat of an outlier with how our kids are doing academically."

Maybe that comment has nothing to do with the general student body. But Missouri is certainly not an academic outlier in the Big 12. Whatever you think of the US News rankings, putting Mizzou 102nd among national universities (tied with Oklahoma) seems about right. That puts them behind Texas, Texas A&M, Colorado, KU, Iowa State, and Baylor. In other words, their academics rate somewhere in the bottom half of the conference.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews....rankings/page+5

[slufanskip]

Maybe that comment has nothing to do with the general student body. But Missouri is certainly not an academic outlier in the Big 12. Whatever you think of the US News rankings, putting Mizzou 102nd among national universities (tied with Oklahoma) seems about right. That puts them behind Texas, Texas A&M, Colorado, KU, Iowa State, and Baylor. In other words, their academics rate somewhere in the bottom half of the conference.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews....rankings/page+5

Yes, but Mizzou people also feel they have a history of being a football powerhouse. I guess it's really a matter of perspective.

[kevinfootes]

The guy who wrote that seemed to think the border state thing was like a wives tail, at least that's the way I interpreted what he said. Here is something I know, I have no idea whether the Big 10 considers Texas a viable option, but I do know that there is support from people close to the Texas program who also claim there is support from within. I'm not saying Texas has decided they go if asked, I don't have a way to know that. If there was really no way Texas could join, or the Big 10 wasn't interested, there would be no real support and there is.

I also think what this guy says makes sense. The Big 12 would probably break up or be severly weakened with Mizzou or Nebraska going. Why would Texas let that happen? They won't. Even if their is a bylaw, when you consider the advantages of the Big 10 taking Texas over Mizzou financially, I can't imagine they wouldn't be changed.

Who knows for sure though. I think something will happen though.

I'm not sure conference implosion is what the NCAA is looking for at this point. IMO, the NCAA would be better off if they didn't require 12 teams in a conference to have a football championship game. Then the Big 10/11 could get more revenue and not have to worry about expansion.

Skip, when the Big 12 was forming Baylor was not going to be included. Ann Richards (a Baylor grad) went nuts and threatened to cut funding for Texas, A&M, and Tech if they didn't include Baylor. While the Longhorns are the big fish down there, the many other schools have political connections as well. Unlitmately a state university president has to answer to politicians. I not saying that Texas won't break away from the other schools in the state, but it might be a little more complicated than you think.

[For-DaLove]

Texas isn't going to join. Any media source that believes so is an idiot. The Big 10 is proud of their bi-laws and they aren't going to change them for one school. The conference has always wanted Notre Dame, but it would hurt them too bad finanacially so it probably won't happen.

A lot of people believe the Big 10 will try to capture the NY market, so Rutgers is an option.

The main reason Mizzou is being discussed is because the Big 10 believes they could put a strangle-hold on the St. Louis market if they had Mizzou and Illinois. It would also give them some of the KC market

[Box and Won]

Maybe that comment has nothing to do with the general student body. But Missouri is certainly not an academic outlier in the Big 12. Whatever you think of the US News rankings, putting Mizzou 102nd among national universities (tied with Oklahoma) seems about right. That puts them behind Texas, Texas A&M, Colorado, KU, Iowa State, and Baylor. In other words, their academics rate somewhere in the bottom half of the conference.

http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews....rankings/page+5

Those rankings fluctuate quite a bit, and the large number of ties throw things off a little. Mizzou has been in the 70s in previous years, and this is the first year I can remember that KU has been ranked higher.

And as Pistol said, the rankings for a few of the Big Ten schools are probably higher than they should be.

[lawyerbilliken07]

Texas isn't going to join. Any media source that believes so is an idiot. The Big 10 is proud of their bi-laws and they aren't going to change them for one school. The conference has always wanted Notre Dame, but it would hurt them too bad finanacially so it probably won't happen.

A lot of people believe the Big 10 will try to capture the NY market, so Rutgers is an option.

The main reason Mizzou is being discussed is because the Big 10 believes they could put a strangle-hold on the St. Louis market if they had Mizzou and Illinois. It would also give them some of the KC market

I've heard a lot about Rutgers, too. Anyone heard anything about who the Big East would try to pick up if Rutgers left?

If Mizzou, or even Kansas, K-State, or Iowa State, goes to the Big 10, that could certainly make things interesting. Every school in the Big 12 North other than Nebraska has to be at least somewhat dissatisfied with that conference and may be looking to get out. I know, for example, that a lot of people (fans, at least) have been agitating for Colorado to move to the Pac-10.

[cheeseman]

Geography is over rated. It won't play as much as you think. What do you know about Vince Young's academics? Do you have some inside info, or did you decide he couldn't really deserve a degree from a good school by an interview you saw on TV?

First of all I do kind of agree with you about the geography thing that is why I think it has no real merit in the SLU A10 discussion. I only mentioned it because if some want to make it the corner stone of their reasoning for why SLU should not be in the A10 then they better use if for why Texas should not be in the Big 10. As far as the Vince Young point goes - it was based on the draft mental capacity test the NFL gives to draft eligible players invited to the Combine. It was widely reported that he scored very low on the test. I have not formed any opinion about him from any interview.

[slufanskip]

Texas isn't going to join. Any media source that believes so is an idiot. The Big 10 is proud of their bi-laws and they aren't going to change them for one school. The conference has always wanted Notre Dame, but it would hurt them too bad finanacially so it probably won't happen.

A lot of people believe the Big 10 will try to capture the NY market, so Rutgers is an option.

The main reason Mizzou is being discussed is because the Big 10 believes they could put a strangle-hold on the St. Louis market if they had Mizzou and Illinois. It would also give them some of the KC market

and you have some kind of inside knowledge that would enable you to call people who have more info than you an idiot?

[slufanskip]

First of all I do kind of agree with you about the geography thing that is why I think it has no real merit in the SLU A10 discussion. I only mentioned it because if some want to make it the corner stone of their reasoning for why SLU should not be in the A10 then they better use if for why Texas should not be in the Big 10. As far as the Vince Young point goes - it was based on the draft mental capacity test the NFL gives to draft eligible players invited to the Combine. It was widely reported that he scored very low on the test. I have not formed any opinion about him from any interview.

I think he had to go back to get his degree. I don't know that I'd use an NFL mental capacity test to determine if someone should have a degree or not though. Add to that, one that I didn't actually know the results of.

We've had players at SLU that probably weren't the brightest kids, but they came andf worked hard and got their degree. I don't know if that somehow diminishes the worth of a degree at SLU.

Geography is a silly reason, they don't travel by horse and buggy, or even bus anymore. IF UT can bring many more dollars to the Big 10 than the next option, the money will win out over the bylaws. It always does.

[slufanskip]

I'm not sure conference implosion is what the NCAA is looking for at this point. IMO, the NCAA would be better off if they didn't require 12 teams in a conference to have a football championship game. Then the Big 10/11 could get more revenue and not have to worry about expansion.

Skip, when the Big 12 was forming Baylor was not going to be included. Ann Richards (a Baylor grad) went nuts and threatened to cut funding for Texas, A&M, and Tech if they didn't include Baylor. While the Longhorns are the big fish down there, the many other schools have political connections as well. Unlitmately a state university president has to answer to politicians. I not saying that Texas won't break away from the other schools in the state, but it might be a little more complicated than you think.

maybe so, but I still say if the Big 10 wants Texas and Texas wants the Big 10 it'll happen. .... not to mention the money to be gained for both sides seems to make it something that will be considered.

[Postcard]

I think he had to go back to get his degree. I don't know that I'd use an NFL mental capacity test to determine if someone should have a degree or not though. Add to that, one that I didn't actually know the results of.

We've had players at SLU that probably weren't the brightest kids, but they came andf worked hard and got their degree. I don't know if that somehow diminishes the worth of a degree at SLU.

Geography is a silly reason, they don't travel by horse and buggy, or even bus anymore. IF UT can bring many more dollars to the Big 10 than the next option, the money will win out over the bylaws. It always does.

I've not heard of Texas as an option for the Big 10 before you started mentioning them in every post. Do you get some kind of finders fee if they move? Texas will never move to the Big 10. I can guarantee that.